Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5

Comments

Santa FE 6 cylinder 2.7 GLS with auto 2007: When I went to two dealerships, noticed fit and trim problems with the Santa Fe as far as wiper blades that seem to already be rusting, deep scratches on the paint on new car, after market parts falling off. Twice on two different cars right in front of me. Really scares me that these issues are there though cosmetic they could lead me to believe there are mechanical issues that I should also be concerned with. Not sure I trust MPG that is stated on window, edmunds forum tends to agree. Two interior colors camel and light grey. Rather have darker interiors. Nice looking SUV on the outside. Large cargo and interior.

CRV: 4 cylinder 2008Thought it was a bit smaller and noiser and slower then the other two. I seem to have issues with inline 4. Rather have the DOHC, Real time price was slightly higher then other two. Great colors for inside and out. Like it that it comes with a dark interior. But could always use more colors. MPG also goood, Honda MPG rating not as reliable as Toyotas.

RAV 4: 4 cylinder 2007 Not as noisey or slow as the CRV maybe due to DOHC. Limited interior colors but darker grey then the Santa FE. Gets pretty good MPG and I actually believe the window when it comes to that since I have had many toyotas with stated MPG being realistic. Prices tend to fluculate depending on what is available on the lot at the time.

Not sure there are any other SUV's I would be interested in. The Saturn hybrid VUE was interesting but I tend to think GM can't make decent engine/transmission/suspension/electrical. They even went as far as putting in a honda drivetrain at one point. The 2008 dont even have the plastic door panels which I think was a big mistake to get rid of.

Interior colors a big problem with me when they are too light. I want to keep these cars for many many years. If they get nasty looking it turns me off.

The Santa Fe is also available with a black interior (though only in the Limited model). As for your concerns about "fit and trim problems", the items you mentioned reflect mishandling by the dealer, not a quality problem with the vehicle.

Have you driven any of these vehicles? If not, I suggest that you do.

I also suggest that you take a close look at the Hyundai Tucson. It comes with the same 2.7 liter V6 as the Santa Fe GLS and it's a FANTASTIC little SUV, especially in Limited trim. Check it out.

I like the design, More high-end than sporty IMO (i.e. the Mazda5) W/o the 3rd row it will be difficult to justify it as a family car/crossover/Mid Size Mambo Jumbo SUV category I guess (4 seater?). Is it confirmed for North America?

Fellow Gearhead here. Road raced, wore a TR3, raced at Wilson's Glen (1 step down from Watkin's Glen), Jaguar, MG, Triumph. Motorcycles: Harley, Ducati, Honda. Okay, creds in. No minivan, suv, crossover or wagon is going to be fun to drive if you think 2 wheeled curves are juicy. Anything in the above category is too tall, too slow in the shift (it's an automatic, man!), too soft in the struts and just not meant for clenching your jaw and praying. Tell your husband from me, you can't double clutch a minivan, but you can keep your wife and kids safe and well transported. Get your husband some sort of used fun-to-drive-something and get the Rondo for your family. You'll never get both in one package.

Well the Rondo and Mazda5 are both good vehicles. I think the comparasion of them are on point. They are not SUV's hence they do not offer of All Wheel Drive or hig ground clearance but does have room as most small SUV's. The Hyundai Santa Fe is now a midsized ute but priced alittle above compact ute's. Hyundai is really trying for it to compete with midsized not compacts anymore. And then there's the Rav4 and Outlander, good rivals in every aspect but the Outlander does not offer a 4 cylinder engine yet while the Rav4 does. Sorry but for me it seems like the Santa Fe is kinda left out and isolated in this forum, I really think it should be in a Mid SUV comparasion

It is really is its own class of auto vehicle for 07..Not a SUV, Mini UTE,, not too much economy or mid sized, or really about anything else eithe TO FURTHER MAKE MY POINT...MY LAST AUTOS WERE:...04 AUDI A4... .Honda ELEMENT 05(ON A WHIM), 04 MINI COOPER S (heavily MODIFIED) AND FUN, but poor reliability!!! The SF...well as said...just different...AND SO FAR ANYWAY.

I also have not developed the need/want to make or ,add changes; My Maturity...I doubt it! :shades: I just like ,cars!!!!

Still admittedly, I kept an 81 Porsche 911 SC for 13 yrs...yes, I am single and like my toys! Never, should have sold that one!

Just returned from a short shopping trip and wondered, if I had to compare this SF to anything comparable . , what would it be? Closest I could come up with was a Outlander (and that seemed more aimed at a Lexus 350 anyway. (BUT MISSED)

HOWEVER iT SEEMS quite a bit more refined AND CONSERVATIVE" than the Outlander (imho)IS, THUS (GOODIES ASIDE)...fUNNY, THEY MISSED LOTS OF SMALL STUFF LIKE AN iPOD CONNECTOR AND OPTIONAL hid LIGHTING ETC. eVEN THE ENGINE LAYOUT IS PRETTY WELL PLACED AT THIS POINT IN ITS EVOLUTION

I JUST COULD NOT FIND A COMPARABLE ...AND I HAVE DRIVEN MOST OF THE OTHERS. Funny, was not even attracted to the 06 and prior...THE KOREANS HAVE STUDIED WHAT THE AMERICANS wanted,and in a very short time span (1 generation?)re liability AND LONGEVITY,...YET OTHER FACTOR(S)TO BE WATCHED CLOSELY.

HYUNDAI SEEMS TO HAVE ANTICIPATED MY NEEDS HERE QUITE WELL :shades:

fROM A PRICE, PERFORMANCE, VALUE, LOOKS, practical...IT REALLY HAS I get lots of "what was that thing anyway looks with it!"DONE THE OTHERS QUITE A BIT BETTER."

Auto buying is about needs and compromises...there are not many compromises to be found from my perspective. The missed just a few items that people would want (Now to get rid if the name...HYUNDAI...Sigh...I guess that will come too

But if everyone thought that, the SF would be a lot more popular than it is. 2008 should be a very interesting year for the SF. If you see a "spike" in sales, they did it properly...if not, I guessed wrong. By this time I usually begin to tire of a car...so far, not hhis one

All vehicles have their high and low points and the SF certainly has it own...Just can't come up with any major ones for now. If they are smart, they will take their learnings and continue to refine to more of a degree than even the Japanese have done!fOR $30K, I WOULD BE A BIT HARDER PRESSED TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT!!!!(MINE IS A SUB 25K se MODEL. aNOTHER THING WAS THAT I THINK i WOULD HAVE TIRED A BIT OF THEN gls MODEL BY NOW (i AM COMPULSIVE TOO)THE SE JUST SEEMS TO FILL THAT GAP BETWEEN THE LIMITED AND gls AS WELL!

I MAY EVEN KEEP THIS ONE FOR A WHILE! :shades: assuming we still have gasoline to ,run em!

Maybe that is why I was so attracted to it back in Feb when I bought one...weaknesses sure...but find a bunch like others have...not a car, van, wagon, SUV or about anything else you can come up with!

Looks like Rondo is really taking off for Kia in the mini-MPV class. While I can attest to both are fantastic, practical vehicles, but from what I hear, the sliding doors have been working against the Mazda5. If that is in fact the case, then the crossover market is really taking off, at the expense of SUV and conventional minivan.

GoOd ReViEw gizzer777, bUt iS dIffICULT to READ wiTh sO many miXed cApiTal LeTTers and BolDs

I agree with you in one thing: Koreans seem to have studied the mainstream American market well as they are selling tons of cars here.

Now, watch out, Chinese have cheap, unreliable unsafe cars now but I think they will also evolve to a NHTSA pass point, you'll see.

It will take me some time, however, to include a Korean car on my shopping list, the bad stigma of driving any of those is still too strong :sick: (plus the dilemma: yes to functionality, no to style).

Yes, good to see the SUV growth slowing down a bit. Except for very few cases, SUV type functionality is not necessary for where is driven.

As per the Mazda5 sliding doors I agree, I believe the main issue in North America is the fact that in these markets sliding doors mean vans or minivans by default. The minivan concept was invented here after all. Also, the Mazda5 came around the time of the Mazda MPV market exit, so it did not support the MAV market idea here.

Now, if you ask a Mazda5 owner (I agree, we are a market minority) the sliding doors top the must-have list as, in reality, it makes the car so versatile.

Well, too much blah, blah. I have enjoyed my car every mile since, it has exceeded my wife's (primary driver) and my expectations with no issues so to what segment is classified in, I'm not worried anymore .

Plus if you see, in all the disparate car comparisons is included in, still fares very well.

"Other interesting thing, possibly related to the one above, is the fact that only very few car research organizations place the Rondo and the Mazda5 in the same segment. Check in here, Where is the Rondo?:"

Yes, I know is in there, but Compact Wagons are different from Full Size Wagons. Now, anywhere else in the World both Rondo and Mazda5 are in the same category (in summary they are not comparing apples to apples).

Yes I agree with CoolMazda5 there are in the same category just like the Chevy HHR and the aging PT Cruiser(which can you believe has been in the same generation for 7 yrs now and probably wont be resigned until 09 or 2010!!!) and then by the way lets not the forget the Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe which basically are the same cars.(They are getting resigned next yr. as a 09 model along with the Corolla)

For 2009, Kia should offer in the Rondo the 3.3 liter V6 which is in the Santa Fe (lol) and Sonata and also the base Azera.

Mazda should put in MAzda5 the Ford sourced 3.0 V6 which is in the Mazda6 and the Tribute or how about this, put in its big bro CX-7 Turbo 4 Cylinder in it.(MazdaSpeed5 lol)

But thats probably just wishful thinking with both Crossovers for me.

IF they do that will help them greatly because the lack of power is one of their major complaints. Thats mostly due to their almost 2 1/2 ton curb weight

Yup I agree with bgw, their gas mileage is actually good and comapare well with 4-Cyl compact and midsize cars, and thats just the V6 model, should the 4 should do even better than that.Also like I mention before about fuel ecomony its good and both them weight as much as Small SUV's, but more frugal in gas, also the more stricted fuel regulations, that lower there fuel ecomony mpg as with mostly every other single automobile.

This is a copy of "carstalk" post from another tread on this forum:" Consumer Report listed Mitsubishi Outlander as best small SUV choice for reliability. Honda tops Toyota, but no mention of Rav4, CR-V and Santa Fe... Read article on http://www.mercurynews.com/drive/ci_7200769then click on related story "Toyota slips behind rivals..."

The Institute For Consumer Automotive Research (never heard of them before, but I'm not American) compared nine rather disparate vehicles under the category, Inexpensive 6-Passenger Vehicles. The website states, "These nine represent an odd grouping, but they share the merits of additional passenger capacity under $20,000, using CarsDirect target prices for vehicles with an automatic transmission." There will probably be great discussion over the sanity of grouping these vehicles together, but hey, I'm just the messenger. So which is the best budget-priced passenger hauler? Here are the results:

(BTW, for the zero or one of you who might be wondering why I haven't been posting in these comparative threads like I used to, it's because I simply had run out of things to say. When I started telling increasingly irrelevant anecdotes--much like this one --I knew it was time to move on.)

OK, I have to say this article is completely out of line. I understand comparing all 6 passenger vehicles under $20K, but at least half of these vehicles start at over $20K and are a max of 5 passengers. Plus, there are a number of other inconsistancies with this article. :confuse: :confuse: :confuse: :confuse: :confuse:

Yes indeed, which is very good news as it has been highlighted often by auto-tranny potential buyers (I drive manual so no trouble here :P). A Wall Street Journal review is reporting 1-2 MPG improvements (22MPG City-28MPG Highway I believe) over the 2006-2007 4AT, yet to be honest I think some more realistic numbers will come until the 08s hit the road .